In very noisy environments, workers often wear earplugs or other hearing protection designed with high noise blocking capabilities (such as a noise reduction rating or NRR at or around 33). But in moderately noisy environments, a lower level of hearing protection (with NRR in a range of 20 to 30, by way of example) may be sufficient to effectively offer protection from background noise in the workplace. Such lower NRR levels can also be useful in moderately noisy environments, because they may allow workers to have some ability to hear useful, non-dangerous sounds, while still being adequately protected from long-term background noise that could lead to hearing damage. By way of example, it may be useful for workers to be able to hear a supervisor or co-worker shouting over the background noise, allowing for some verbal communication in the moderately noisy workplace which may improve work efficiency and workplace safety.
Allowing such useful sounds through to the user, while blocking out damaging levels of sound exposure in accordance with OSHA or other health regulations, may also help workers be able to leave the hearing protection in place throughout the day (since some necessary communication may be possible without the need to remove the earplugs). This may further help to ensure that the workers are adequately protected from damaging workplace background noise exposure, since workers will not need to remove the earplugs in order to communicate (which would expose them to damaging levels of sound for a period of time without any hearing protection), and since workers will not have to remove and replace the earplugs throughout the workday as they try to communicate (which could lead to improper insertion of the earplug in a manner that does not offer sufficient protection, since the earplugs would then be inserted in less than ideal circumstances). It also may be important to ensure that hearing protection is not so complete that workers would be unable to hear alarms or other audible warning signals.
Applicant has also found that, while press-in (non-rolldown) earplugs may be considered simpler to insert by many users and may typically be less prone to soiling (since they are handled less by users), comfort concerns may need to be addressed; the stiffness often needed for effective push-in insertion may cause discomfort. Applicant has also found that standard press-in type earplugs with extended handles (in which the more rigid handles protrude from the foam earplug) may be unsatisfactory in several ways. For example, the handles tend to produce a level of discomfort when the handle contacts the ear canal wall and/or comes into direct contact with external portions of the concha. Indeed, the extended handles may also come into contact with external objects as they jut out from the user's ear, making their use difficult in conjunction with some hats, helmets, glasses, etc, and creating a safety risk since exterior objects could inadvertently contact the handle and drive the earplug too deep within the ear canal. Additionally, extended handles tend to produce a level of resonance that may negatively affect the sound attenuating properties of these earplugs (with the handles acting similarly to a tuning fork). Thus, Applicant has considered techniques that may improve comfort while allowing for effective insertion of the earplug in a user's ear canal.